9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (4) TMI 910X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cers based their decision on the law the Advance Ruling Authority laid down in the case of M/s. B.U. Bhandari Auto. If this order is reversed, the implication of the order passed by the Tribunal will have to be considered in each case of the Petitioners. Therefore, an enquiry must be conducted to determine whether the facts of each Petitioner case warrant similar treatment. The Writ Petitions are disposed off by quashing and setting aside the impugned assessment orders in each of these Petitions - Commissioner would examine the issue pending before the Commissioner in light of the decision rendered by the Tribunal in the case of M/s. B.U. Bhandari Auto and in the context of the provisions of Section 55 of the Act referred and take the decisions as per law. Petition disposed off. - NITIN JAMDAR AND ABHAY AHUJA, JJ. WRIT PETITION No. 2512 OF 2021, 166 OF 2023, 167 OF 2023 , 173 OF 2023, 168 OF 2023, 169 OF 2023, 174 OF 2023, 170 OF 2023, 171 OF 2023, 172 OF 2023, 175 OF 2023, 176 OF 2023, 177 OF 2023, 178 OF 2023, 179 OF 2023, 180 OF 2023, 181 OF 2023, 406 OF 2023, 410 OF 2023 , 407 OF 2023 , 409 OF 2023, 408 OF 2023, 423 OF 2023 WRIT PETITION (L) NO. 3658 OF 2023, 478 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 61/2021, 3727/2021. Ms. Jyoti Chavan, AGP for the State in WPs No. 446/2022, 439/2022. Mr. Himanshu Takke, AGP for the State in WPs(L) No. 7052/2022, 24664/2022. Ms. Swatantri Waghmare, Advocate for Respondent No. 1 in WP No. 2834/2021. Mr. Ratan Samal with Mr. Manohar Samal, Advocates for the Petitioners in WPs No. 5546/2022, 5547/2022, 5548/2022, 5549/2022, 5550/2022, 89326/2021, 9340/2021, 9341/2021 and 9339/2021. Mr. Hemang Raythattha with Mr. Swapnil Shikhare i/by M/s. RMG Law Associates, Advocate for the Petitioners in WPs No. 1985/2021 and 9428/2021. Mr. Rahul Thakar i/by Mr. C.B. Thakar, Advocates for the Petitioner in WP No. 4691/2021. Mr. V.T. Dubey a/w. Mr. N.K. Dubey, Advocates for Petitioner in WP No. 5600/2021. Mr. Shashikant Gaikwad i/by Mr. Sharad Bhattad, Advocates for the Petitioners in WPs No. 3685/2020 and 3686/2020. Mrs. Shruti D. Vyas, B Panel Counsel for the Respondent-State. Mr. Ishaan Patkar i/by M/s Alaksha Legal, Advocate for the Petitioners in WPs No. 582/2023, 260/2022 and 261/2022. ORAL JUDGMENT : (PER NITIN JAMDAR, J.) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Respondents were served. Taken for dis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... icles , irrespective of the fact that such vehicle continuing to be stock-in-trade or not being treated as capital asset in the books of accounts of the Applicants ? (4) Whether the prayer of prospective effect, considering the fact that the decision of the Hon. High Court of Judicature at Bombay in the case of Sehgal Autoriders Private Limited was rendered on 11th July, 2011 and whereas the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of K.T.C. Automobiles was rendered only on 29th January, 2016? 6. Tribunal has rendered its decision on 6 March 2023 and has concluded thus : (b) The impugned Advance Ruling Order in respect of the registration Charges, insurance Charges, handling charges received and paid on behalf of the customer of a motor vehicle, form part of the sale price of such motor vehicle, is modified. And, it is held that, these charges cannot fall within the extended meaning of the expression sale price considering the provisions of Section 2(25) of the MVAT Act. (c) The impugned Advance Ruling Order in respect of the Incentive and discount, received from the automotive manufacturers form part of the sale price or needs t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... case may be, all the questions prescribed under sub-section (1) to such Advance Ruling Authority. (4) The Commissioner may also allot any application or question in such application made under section 56 and pending on the date of effect of this amendment or, as the case may be, any class of applications, to such Advance Ruling Authority. (5) The Commissioner or, as the case may be, the Advance Ruling Authority shall, subject to rules, make Advance Ruling, within ninety days from the date of acceptance of the application by the Commissioner or, as the case may be, the Advance Ruling Authority. (6) The applicant may withdraw his application within thirty days from the date of submission of the application. (7) (a) No application shall be accepted where the question raised in the application,- (i) is already pending before the Tribunal, Bombay High Court or, as the case may be, the Supreme Court in respect of the applicant, or (ii) relates to a transaction or issue which is designed apparently for the avoidance of tax. (b) The Commissioner or, as the case may be, the Advance Ruling Authority, may call for a report from the concerned officer, in th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... portunity of being heard: Provided further that, an order under this sub-section shall be passed within a period of sixty days from the date of receipt of the Advance Ruling by the applicant. (14) (a) The Commissioner may, on his own motion call for the record of any Advance Ruling issued by the Advance Ruling Authority to examine as to whether the said ruling is erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interests of revenue. The Commissioner may, by serving on the applicant a notice in the prescribed form pass such order as he thinks just and proper. (b) The Commissioner may also, for reasons to be recorded in writing on his own motion, review the Advance Ruling passed by him under this section and pass such order as he thinks just and proper. However, before initiating any action under this clause, the Commissioner shall obtain prior permission of the State Government. Such permission shall also be obtained when the Advance Ruling order is proposed to be made contrary to the order passed by the Commissioner under Section 56. (c) The Commissioner may direct that, the order of review shall not affect the liability of the person in whose case review is made ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to be considered in each case of the Petitioners. Therefore, an enquiry must be conducted to determine whether the facts of each Petitioner case warrant similar treatment. 11. In light of the above discussion, we dispose of the Writ Petitions by quashing and setting aside the impugned assessment orders in each of these Petitions. The assessment proceedings are restored to file before the concerned Commissioner of Sales Tax. The Commissioner would examine the issue pending before the Commissioner in light of the decision rendered by the Tribunal in the case of M/s. B.U. Bhandari Auto and in the context of the provisions of Section 55 of the Act referred to above and take the decisions as per law. 12. We make it clear that we have not concluded on other aspects that may arise during the assessment proceedings other than the decision of the Tribunal in the case of M/s. B.U. Bhandari Auto and the Commissioner would examine the facts of each case and pass the order as per law. Needless to state, the contentions of the Petitioners and the department are expressly kept open. 13. In the light of setting aside the impugned assessment orders as above, the consequential effects of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
